Rifle/carbine stance?

[NCPatrolAR]

For effective carbine use and optimal hand placement; most people end up using a slightly bladed stance. Picture dominate side foot back about .5 to 1 full step from the support side foot with both feet pointed forward as much as possible. This will cause the torso to blade slightly which the dominate side shoulder moving slightly to the rear. This should allow you to move your support hand out closer to the muzzle which is best for managing recoil and transitioning from target to target. The magwell grip is an extremely poor grip and isn't used much by people in the know.

I'm not a fan of the extreme bladed/Camp Perry position since it greatly increases your chance of suffering a cross torso shot (single round striking both lungs and the heart). When more square to a threat, you stand a better chance of surviving any wound you might encounter.

 

[1stmarine]

The relation with this aikido form doesn't have to do with the sword form as much as the feeling in the end at the stop point. I can see how many other forms offensive and defensive from other martial arts disciplines can give similar feeling and attitude. I just picked up one (out of many others) that provides the one point feeling I use.
The correct shooting stance should be rehearsed over and over and the feeling is what it counts.
Also use a large mirror to correct your form, feet position or even how to better arrange magazines for reload, etc... Similar concept as shadow boxing.

Cheers.
E.

 

[benEzra]

I tried the "squared up" stance and it just didn't work as well for me as a somewhat bladed stance. Not as bladed as a slung-up Highpower shooter, certainly, but comfortably bladed with the support hand all the way out on the grip. I don't wear body armor, so I don't see the squared-up stance as being advantageous for me, and it seemed to promote overswing and more muzzle float during recoil.

 

[Cop Bob]

Another Take on It......and how to imporve your scores! REALLY!

I use either or a bladed stance.. it depends on the situation...available cover,concealment and distances..

In CQB, it will change as you transition, left doorway, right doorway, clearing a hall or stair.. TRUST ME, there are times that you cannot make yourself small enough.. I've seen 200 lb officers trying to get skinny behind saplings trees that could not have been 3 or 4 " in diameter.. Talk about a blade stance! But when there are nitrates in the air.. cover is cover, you take what you can get..

My take on the squared stance is, and I related it to martial arts as well, is a form of the modified 'Horse" Stance.. from which to deliver the most power in a punch,, which in a way, is what we are attempting to do...

When I was taught this technique in the mid 70's it was as a "trick" or technique for accurate subgun control at distance..It practically eliminates muzzle rise.. and believe me this different way... (in a minute) taught me I could take a Thompson, or my Schmeisser, and put a 32 round magazine, all within the 9 ring at 25 yards.... My A-180 became a cinder blocks wost nightmare at 100 yards...

I later tried it with carbines, and found that I could instinctively make quick body hits at well over 100... really with just a quick snap shot... It has many advantages...

The stance that I was introduced to is all bout making a solid platform, and keeping your sights CENTERLINE of the body...

Simply take a squared away stance to the target. Place the center of the butt right in the center of your chest. both arms forming a modified isosceles
grip. With the AR platform and adjustable butt stocks it is easier, especially with body armor. I too, often grip by the mag well... hey, it works!

When you present your weapon the the target, it is always in the centerline of your body, and unconsciously, subconsciously. You are utilizing your sights through you peripheral vision. With the muzzle centerline to your line of sight, and a good comfortable grip on the weapon, you will be centerline of you and the target..

We train our cadets, and my individual students to always be prepared "to take the shot" That is that you keep shuffling your feet to brace and face the centerline of the targets centermass..

Rookies would sometimes ask me (before we actually incorporated it in cadet training) why when interviewing a suspect on the street that I would continually shuffle my feet (very slight usually), whenever the suspect would move. I would explain that is was setting up for the shot if need be. continually keeping my centerline matched up to his center mass.. (if he didn't get it, I would just tell him I liked to dance)

How we taught this is is, with hands empty... pick out a small spot on the wall, then put your hand together as if gripping a pistol, and acquire that spot using the notch formed at the base of the thump of the strong (gun) hand as a sight reference.

Then CLOSE YOUR EYES, come up on the target again... nowhere near it.. now slightly shuffle your feet until you can come up on the target blind, and be on it.. repeat as necessary. This is your natural relation to the target for rapid instinctive shots. Soon this becomes instinctive, and automatic, 2nd nature.. it works. (ahh, if you are a two handed shooter, your regular scores will come up too.. your no longer fighting your body's instincts to move to center.. your already there..!)

IT WORKS WITH RIFLE AND CARBINE TOO...... Try it, you may like it...

I have taken 22's, Mini-14's, AR's, heck even my Garands, and done 100 center mass snap shots... it impresses the heck outta folks... it's not hard, You may or may not hit the x-ring, but it will be in or dang near the centerline of the target... (backbone, neck, CNS, and the boiler room)

It's nothing more than applied basics... Solid gun mount (you) properly aimed at the target (this time with your feet) and use of sights... using your minds "Master eye". Open both eyes always of them because your master eye will be dominant.. and your target sighting will not shift.. Shoot both eyes open, to keep your peripheral vision in play, it can save you..

The most accurate sighting system available to you is your brain, and its indicator is your finger... it always goes where you point it, it never misses, because your mind and your eyes are MUCH MORE accurate than you are.. it is just a matter of training your body to work WITH your eyes and mind... eyes and arms are mounted an equal distance from your centerline for a reason.. this just helps you to use that design feature to become a more accomplished instinctive shooter... now, stop, point at something..anything. when you do, freeze motionless and notice, that you pointing finger is now centerline of your nose... or centerline to your body... GOT YA.. Now you understand...

Now as this relates to carbines and combat, I find it easy to move if need be, easy to transition from or too strong or weak shoulder if cover and conditions dictate, and it is easy to may VERY accurate snap shots, simply by keeping the butt AND muzzle planted centerline of my line of sight.

With a pistol in this technique, it is all bout proper grip, front sight straight through to the center of the elbow... no different than what we have all ways been taught..Proper Grip is proper grip, don't care if it is Bullesye or IPSIC... if its Grandpaws Dragoon, or you 1911 When your hands come together at the centerline of your body, you will automatically, instinctively transition the the proper alignment.

I have also found that my holographic sights work well with this technique..

Try it... you will be surprised..Hope this helps...

Understand, this is NOT an answer or technique for all situations, it helps greatly with pistol and carbine, for finely accurate shooting, you shoulder and use the sights as always. This technique is just another tool for the drawer..

 

[Sheepdog1968]

Sheepdog, that squared-up stance is a martial arts stance, as well.

And you may have heard of boxing, the most effective extant unarmed Western fighting art? Similar stance.

JShirley, your point is well taken. Many of the martial art styles (I'm not say all) don't square up for sparring. Typically one leg is back some (how far back and/or what angle tends to be a function of style). If the boxing stance is squared up and that is what you've trained with and are most comfortable with it both for boxing and shooting then it's a good choice for you.

 

[Cosmoline]

Another reason for the traditional stance--the rifles used to weigh a lot more and be a lot longer. Not to mention heavy recoil.

Works great at close-intermediate range. If I had the time, and didn't need the immediate mobility to engage or break contact, I would always take a knee.

That makes sense. Off-hand would be limited to situations where you're having to move to concealment and cover, or in pursuit. If you have time to take a better off-hand stance, you might as well take that time to go down to a kneel instead. It's much more stable and makes you a smaller target.

 

[henschman]

The traditional marksman's offhand position (i.e. approximately 90 degrees off target with trigger elbow chicken winged out and forward elbow under the rifle, the support elbow leaning on the rib cage or using a sling), is intended to maximize stability and minimize muscle input. This is great when the situation calls for more precise shooting. Obviously there are more stable positions, but sometimes you have to take a shot on a small or distant target from standing. Of course you can use solid objects to augment this position if necessary, such as a door frame or a tree.

When you are trying to achieve maximum accuracy, the object is always to minimize muscle input. Close quarters is the exact opposite. You are in a dynamic environment that requires movement, and involves the possibility of targets presenting quickly and possibly in very different places. With close quarters, you WANT to muscle the rifle, in order to quickly bring it onto target. The loss in precision accuracy doesn't matter so much because the targets are very close.

For close quarters, I stand facing approximately 45 degrees off target toward my trigger side. My trigger side elbow is tucked in rather than chicken winged, and my support hand is just about as far forward as I can get it on the handguard. I am hunched forward slightly. The far forward hand gives me better muzzle control and lets me transition quickly from target to target.

A truly squared up stance is just like an isocoles stance with a pistol... if you have to move, you have to unload one hip, load the other, and step. However, in a 45 degree "bladed" stance, like with a "weaver" stance, you can push off with either foot and quickly move in either direciton. It is more compatible with moving while firing. If you are totally squared up to the target, you have to do a sort of "shuffle" with your feet. The 45 degree stance allows for more natural movement. Also, a 45 degree type of position is better if you have to fight with the rifle other than by firing it at the enemy. Also, the stock of a rifle is designed to be placed in your shoulder. A squared-up stance requires you to put it on your chest, which is awkward.

I think the squared up stance is a stance that sacrifices stability and mobility in order to increase the probability of survival if the enemy hits you when wearing armor. I am more a fan of the notion that hits count and misses don't, and that the quickest way to end a firefight is to finish it first... not to sacrifice your ability to make hits in hope that when the enemy hits you, it won't kill you. I don't own body armor anyway, so I never use or practice the squared up stance.

 

[9mmepiphany]

A truly squared up stance is just like an isocoles stance with a pistol... if you have to move, you have to unload one hip, load the other, and step. However, in a 45 degree "bladed" stance, like with a "weaver" stance, you can push off with either foot and quickly move in either direciton. It is more compatible with moving while firing. If you are totally squared up to the target, you have to do a sort of "shuffle" with your feet. The 45 degree stance allows for more natural movement.

I think you were either taught an older style of movement or you misunderstand movement dynamics.

With a bladed stance, like the Weaver, you have free movement only toward your open side, with the more balanced squared stance, all sides are equally open.

Correct movement doesn't require loading of one hip and unloading the other to move it...you load the hip in the direction you want to move, the unloaded leg follows the shift. It sounds like you are trying to control the fall, when you should be letting it lead the movement.

It is like the change from the controlled turn taught be Cooper and Taylor in their version of the Modern Technique and the spinning turn currently being taught

 

[Creature]

I was once told by an instructor at a well-known training facility that a square-to-threat stance offer a better chance at a single organ being traversed by a through and through bullet ...vice a bullet transiting through multiple organs if hit on the diagonal. And he said it with a straight face.

 

[1stmarine]

Squared 100% is not practical.
I mentor folks in the simple technique of how to better themselves and the assessment varies from person to person. It depends on body type, attitude, weapons system, etc.. In last drill I had a 7.2 feet giant working with a 5.1 guy so we had to adapt to the course as it is in real life.

There is so much stuff out there that you can easily go nuts. Just train every week with good people and things will happen magically and naturally.

Cheers,
E.

 

[Cop Bob]

9MM, this is correct, you are not 100% square to the target, one foot will actually be slightly forward of the other, by about half the distance of the foot. Load bearing is equal, as well as having ability to keep your head on a swivel if needed. You can actually move very quickly and very smoothly.. all the while maintaining good threat cover.. It is very smooth transitioning stairwells, and hallways, Being able to cover large areas, like a warehouse of open field.. only way to go.. easy to cover left or right, smoothly without radical body swings or shifts, no need to have to over compensate for a heavily bladed stance if a threat is presented to the weak side..

Of all the styles mentioned, and looking at, like the C.A.R. shooting system or method, they a bad rap the isosceles stance, but ALL of their systems emulate what the isosceles is meant to do, get your gun centerline of your line of sight.. watch their videos, youtube is full of them... not where the gun is in relation to the face.. centered up, gun, close in, slightly lower... but in line and level with the target.. In this position, you are roughly using your sights and don't even realize it.. it is a very solid, battle proven form... not for each situation you may be in.. but it is a good tool to have and know...

 

[1stmarine]

however your form is, prettier or not follow these directives:
Do not loose sight of the target/s.
Code name all your moves with your team if you have one.
Train yourselves to move in terrain you cannot see forward backwards and sideways always stay, sort of floating. Learn how to get a feel with your toes, heels and ankles.
If you are taking fire always put something between the threat/s and yourself.
Keep a rhythm and your brain will automatically know when it is time to reload before the bolt stops.
Patrice effective and timely reloads.
And most important do not run for cover and then shoot but shoot while you move to get cover. A lot of folks died running for cover when they had a fully loaded firearm in their hand.
Train in different drills, with different people if you can. The unknown is the best training there is.
One never is ready. Only, always keeping a good training routine and discipline is the right attitude.
Offense is the best defense.

Like general Patton said: Good tactics can save the worse of the strategies.



Cheers,
E.

 

[Cop Bob]

Total Agreement.... #1 squared... With 1stMarine...

 

[Dr.Rob]

Will try to keep it all in mind Sunday, thanks for the input!

 

[geekWithA.45]

A stance intended to minimize the presentation of body armor's weak points on the side only makes sense when you actually happen to be wearing 35 lbs worth of armor, complete with rifle plates.

In the absence of said armor, a minimized profile makes a lot more sense, especially when the targets are shooting back at you.

You should probably practice both, and deploy according to the answer to the simple question, "Am I wearing armor, right now?"

 

[9mmepiphany]

a minimized profile makes a lot more sense, especially when the targets are shooting back at you.

There is a valid school of thought that suggest that a hit when in the bladed position causes more damage...as the shot is likely to transverse both lungs, the major blood transport system and the spine.

 

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

Can someone post a picture for reference for those that don't really understand what you guys are talking about?

 

[henschman]

The close quarters stance I described looks something like this:

 

[1stmarine]

A modern stance..

vs a more traditional (less fashionable?) stance...